Effectiveness of Reading and Mathematics Software Products: Findings from the First Student Cohort

By Mark Dynarski, Roberto Agodini, S. Heaviside, Timothy Novak, Nancy Carey, Larissa Campuzano, B. Means, R. Murphy, William R. Penuel, Harold S. Javitz and 2 more. 2007

440 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/eb871e56ffcc4d167c3a956d6357aaf49ed22d11

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

The Effectiveness of Online and Blended Learning: A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2013, background): “Research in this area tends to be descriptive of individual learning systems, however, with relatively few rigorous empirical studies comparing learning outcomes for online and conventional approaches (Dynarski et al., 2007; R. Smith, Clark, & Blomeyer, 2005).”
Effective Programs in Middle and High School Mathematics: A Best-Evidence Synthesis (2008, background): “However, the studies that used randomized or randomized quasi-experimental designs (e.g., Becker, 1994; Dynarski et al., 2007), as well as the studies involving 250 students or more, tended to find few effects of CAI.”
New Technology and Digital Worlds: Analyzing Evidence of Equity in Access, Use, and Outcomes (2010, background): “The comparative study involved 9,424 students taught by 428 teachers in 132 schools across the country (Dynarski et al., 2007).”
Every Child, Every Day (2012, background): “This is interesting because research has demonstrated that access to self-selected texts improves students' reading performance (Krashen, 2011), whereas no evidence indicates that workbooks, photocopies, or computer tutorial programs have ever done so (Cunningham & Stanovich, 1998; Dynarski, 2007).”
Critical reflections on the benefits of ICT in education (2012, background): “However, there were some indications that ICT use improved results for reading, though not mathematics, among nine-year-olds (Dynarski et al., 2007).”
Effective Programs for Struggling Readers: A Best-Evidence Synthesis. (2009, unknown): “(2009), Ritter, Barnett, Denny, & Albin (2009), Elbaum et al. (2000), Wasik & Slavin (1994), Wasik (1997), National Reading Panel (2000), Snow, Burns & Griffin (1998), Torgerson, Brooks, & Hall (2006), and Brooks (2007).”
Effective Reading Programs for the Elementary Grades: A Best-Evidence Synthesis (2009, background): “Large, randomized studies by Dynarski et al. (2007) and Campuzano, Dynarski, Agodini, and Rall (2009) found no impact of five current supplemental CAI models.”
A Synthesis of Quantitative Research on Programs for Struggling Readers in Elementary Schools (2021, background): “However, previous reviews of research on elementary CAI applications in reading have reported only modest positive effects (Cheung & Slavin, 2012; Campuzano et al., 2009; Dynarski et al., 2007).”
Introducing Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (2007, background): “Many researchers have accounts of it either not happening, happening too slowly, or happening with no effect on teachers’ or students’ learning (e.g., Cuban, 2001; Dynarski et al., 2007; Ross, Smith, Alberg, & Lowther, 2004).”
Handbook of Research on Learning and Instruction (2011, background): “Thus, children were taught to move based on elite, adult movement models rather than developmentally appropriate patterns such as those that Roberton (1982) described.”
A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems on college students' academic learning (2014, unknown): “…of Cognitive Tutors, were more often based on large national samples, and they employed more rigorous study methods, such as random assignment, and used more distal outcome measures, such as standardized achievement tests (e.g., Campuzano, Dynarski, Agodini, & Rall, 2009; Dynarski et al., 2007).”